Thread: what do you think about the death penalty?

Originally Posted by Suicideking

no, I say we just execute them by a single bullet to the head. Feeding a man, keeping him clothed, running water, and general sanitation costs a fortune. One bullet costs maybe a couple cents and makes society safer

With over 139 people in the United States alone exonerated (while on death row) do you really think we should kill people who might be innocent? 139 is a big number when it comes to wrongful imprisonment on death row... how do we know we haven't killed people who aren't innocent?

We have to follow certain standards for executions, not to mention the amount legal fees cost for such a trial. It's cheaper to keep them alive, because the trials for potentially executable "criminals" require massive amounts of research and digging. Each potential death row case costs millions of dollars. If you don't have death row as an option, immediately it's cheaper.

Imagine you were one of the 139 plus people who was wrongfully-convicted? You'd be happy that you weren't executed, but a little upset that you spent years on death row, not knowing if you'd ever be found truly innocent. Now imagine you were someone who wasn't found innocent even though you were innocent? And then you are executed. On a statistical basis, this is more likely than not to have happened at least once, based on the number of people found innocent on death row since 1970 and the number of people executed.

Originally Posted by ThePreserver

With over 139 people in the United States alone exonerated (while on death row) do you really think we should kill people who might be innocent? 139 is a big number when it comes to wrongful imprisonment on death row... how do we know we haven't killed people who aren't innocent?

We have to follow certain standards for executions, not to mention the amount legal fees cost for such a trial. It's cheaper to keep them alive, because the trials for potentially executable "criminals" require massive amounts of research and digging. Each potential death row case costs millions of dollars. If you don't have death row as an option, immediately it's cheaper.

Imagine you were one of the 139 plus people who was wrongfully-convicted? You'd be happy that you weren't executed, but a little upset that you spent years on death row, not knowing if you'd ever be found truly innocent. Now imagine you were someone who wasn't found innocent even though you were innocent? And then you are executed. On a statistical basis, this is more likely than not to have happened at least once, based on the number of people found innocent on death row since 1970 and the number of people executed.

i would rather die then spend life in prison, even if I was wrongfully convicted, if thats what you are saying

Originally Posted by Suicideking

i would rather die then spend life in prison, even if I was wrongfully convicted, if thats what you are saying

No I'm saying there have been hundreds of exonerated people worldwide... so if you ARE convicted, you can get out a few years later, rather than being executed. I'd rather not have the death penalty constantly hanging over my head, or the knowledge that I may be executed as an innocent person.

Our justice and prison system is so fucked up it's intolerable even without execution.

I agree with that. Prison conditions themselves are intolerable. Rampant plea bargaining (which is unconstitutional) is intolerable. The fact that the death penalty is still in place is the fucked up icing on the fucked up cake.

It's a self sustaining economic burden left alive by useless drug statutes. More and more, prisons are catering to the private sector, for example many prisoners are required to pay 3rd parties to talk to their relatives on the phone. Because the prison system is rewarded by failure to rehabilitate, it thrives on corruption so long as we treat it like a financial institution. Its bottom line is in direct conflict with its purpose for existence.

Does that mean you are supporting executions? I don't see a clear answer to the original question of the thread...

End the drug war. Free up the prison system.

Right, I'm more concerned with ending the drug war and worthless statutes and focusing on the punishment of actual criminals. Once we're just dealing with actual criminals, I'm more interested in removing the junk intricacy from the laws and making them into straight forward human philosophy than can be commonly comprehended. The death penalty is also lunacy, but changing it won't fix our system.

Getting rid of the death penalty WILL change the system. With the death penalty you need to spend hundreds of thousands more dollars for a trial, because you need TWO trials.

Without the death penalty, you can do one standard trial, and if new evidence appears, BAM you can release the person. It will save hundreds of millions of dollars.

Originally Posted by Omnis Dei

Right, I'm more concerned with ending the drug war and worthless statutes and focusing on the punishment of actual criminals. Once we're just dealing with actual criminals, I'm more interested in removing the junk intricacy from the laws and making them into straight forward human philosophy than can be commonly comprehended. The death penalty is also lunacy, but changing it won't fix our system.

Ending the war on drugs will do nothing. It will simply just create more big business(think of lobbying drug companies that want little taxes on their products so ppl will buy them) problems rather than cartel issues. The only way to solve all of this is by fixing the education system. Coming from a very well-to-do private school I can tell you that the inner city kids they bring (diversity stuff, not for it but whatever) in changed from wanna be thugs to very motivated, normal kids. Unfortunately public schools nowadays suck because of cuts back in the 80s. They cut spending from schools because it is not an effect you see quickly and you can put that money elsewhere, it takes years to realize that those cuts just fucked over a jersey shore loving generation that thinks being smart and successful should be on the back-burner of being cool, even if it is completely unethical (murder, drugs, robbery). Then those choices end them in jail and now look where we are.

Originally Posted by Suicideking

Ending the war on drugs will do nothing. It will simply just create more big business(think of lobbying drug companies that want little taxes on their products so ppl will buy them) problems rather than cartel issues. The only way to solve all of this is by fixing the education system. Coming from a very well-to-do private school I can tell you that the inner city kids they bring (diversity stuff, not for it but whatever) in changed from wanna be thugs to very motivated, normal kids. Unfortunately public schools nowadays suck because of cuts back in the 80s. They cut spending from schools because it is not an effect you see quickly and you can put that money elsewhere, it takes years to realize that those cuts just fucked over a jersey shore loving generation that thinks being smart and successful should be on the back-burner of being cool, even if it is completely unethical (murder, drugs, robbery). Then those choices end them in jail and now look where we are.

So let's ban private schools. Force rich parents to give a shit and elect non-douches to office.

Really though, education is not the key to utopia, there are still plenty of dysfunctional people in the world, even if they don't grow up glorifying gangsters. That being said, it's still just as necessary for society to protect education as it is for society to regulate their illegal markets and socialized health care.

And Preserver - You're right about that, government regulation can sometimes just be a means to make the criminals wear ties. But it all comes down to Patents.

DCA is a perfect example of how evil pharmaceutical companies are and how legalizing drugs could actually fuck them over in the long run. DCA was discovered over a century ago and cannot be patented, so there's not much money in researching its effect on cancer but so far it seems to have success rates 40 times greater than chemotherapy. If we legalized drugs we could start to strangle these malicious companies of their excessive profits from their patented alternatives and castrate their endeavors to keep Americans sick.

Ending the drug war won't solve all of the drug problems, but it will solve some border/immigration issues and prisons that are over capacity... Also it will allow people to do what they wish freely by repealing a prohibition on substance. How is it different than alcohol? It's a mind-altering substance that isn't good for you but people do it regardless of whether or not it is legal to them. Just decriminalize marijuana for God's sake... it won't make kids potheads... because any kid who wants access to marijuana already HAS access to marijuana.

Originally Posted by Omnis Dei

So let's ban private schools. Force rich parents to give a shit and elect non-douches to office.

Really though, education is not the key to utopia, there are still plenty of dysfunctional people in the world, even if they don't grow up glorifying gangsters. That being said, it's still just as necessary for society to protect education as it is for society to regulate their illegal markets and socialized health care.

And Preserver - You're right about that, government regulation can sometimes just be a means to make the criminals wear ties. But it all comes down to Patents.

DCA is a perfect example of how evil pharmaceutical companies are and how legalizing drugs could actually fuck them over in the long run. DCA was discovered over a century ago and cannot be patented, so there's not much money in researching its effect on cancer but so far it seems to have success rates 40 times greater than chemotherapy. If we legalized drugs we could start to strangle these malicious companies of their excessive profits from their patented alternatives and castrate their endeavors to keep Americans sick.

Thought you were serious about the private school thing at first. And never heard of DCA before, probably is full of bullshit anyway if no one has used it.

See how my uneducated view of that quickly shoots down everything you have to say. Tunisia invested heavily in education before the revolution and the people revolted because they were all educated and thought that knowledge was important and they realized they were being put down. The same would happen with America and every problem the nation has if the people were more educated

Originally Posted by Suicideking

Thought you were serious about the private school thing at first. And never heard of DCA before, probably is full of bullshit anyway if no one has used it.

See how my uneducated view of that quickly shoots down everything you have to say. Tunisia invested heavily in education before the revolution and the people revolted because they were all educated and thought that knowledge was important and they realized they were being put down. The same would happen with America and every problem the nation has if the people were more educated

"Probably full of bullshit if no one has used it."

Niels Bohr is disappoint with your logic, son. No one uses it because you can't patent it so there's no money in it.

But seriously, I am serious about banning private schools. If you want to educate people, then force them to take responsibility for the society they live in as a whole. Private schools enable the only people capable of changing anything to be completely apathetic about education at large.

Banning adults from teaching whoever they want. Sure is authoritarian in here.

Originally Posted by Xei

Banning adults from teaching whoever they want. Sure is authoritarian in here.

Humor is a fine arguing mechanism. Fallacies are not. If you're going to respond to my point, make sure I actually made it.

Originally Posted by Omnis Dei

"Probably full of bullshit if no one has used it."

Niels Bohr is disappoint with your logic, son. No one uses it because you can't patent it so there's no money in it.

But seriously, I am serious about banning private schools. If you want to educate people, then force them to take responsibility for the society they live in as a whole. Private schools enable the only people capable of changing anything to be completely apathetic about education at large.

you didnt read past my first sentence, way to go.

No private schools? Why shouldn't parents choose where they want to educate their kids? Unless of course you are a communist, in which case, communism doesnt work

Originally Posted by Suicideking

you didnt read past my first sentence, way to go.

No private schools? Why shouldn't parents choose where they want to educate their kids? Unless of course you are a communist, in which case, communism doesnt work

"communism doesn't work" prove it, bitch

TROLOLOLOLOLO JKJK

Originally Posted by Suicideking

you didnt read past my first sentence, way to go.

No private schools? Why shouldn't parents choose where they want to educate their kids? Unless of course you are a communist, in which case, communism doesnt work

Right, putting education before the financial system is communist. And I did read your entire post, I know the power of education. I know the importance of education. I am not trying to refute your point that education is important. I'm just saying private schools are part of what's hindering the development of our education system.

Originally Posted by Omnis Dei

Right, putting education before the financial system is communist. And I did read your entire post, I know the power of education. I know the importance of education. I am not trying to refute your point that education is important. I'm just saying private schools are part of what's hindering the development of our education system.

How do you see that to be true?

Originally Posted by Laughing Man

How do you see that to be true?

As I stated above, it disincentivizes the people who have the power to do anything. It ranks your opportunity based on your parents wealth, thus the wealthy never have to worry about the education system because they can send their kids elsewhere and not partake. Imagine if people weren't forced to partake in Social Security, so the poor are supporting the poor and the rich don't have to help with shit because they're successful. But they're successful off the backs of the fucking poor, the self-made man is a myth, every successful person go there off the work of the common people. The wealthy want to give themselves a rich alternative to everything so they can wash their hands of the problems of the poor.

Originally Posted by Omnis Dei

As I stated above, it disincentivizes the people who have the power to do anything. It ranks your opportunity based on your parents wealth, thus the wealthy never have to worry about the education system because they can send their kids elsewhere and not partake. Imagine if people weren't forced to partake in Social Security, so the poor are supporting the poor and the rich don't have to help with shit because they're successful. But they're successful off the backs of the fucking poor, the self-made man is a myth, every successful person go there off the work of the common people. The wealthy want to give themselves a rich alternative to everything so they can wash their hands of the problems of the poor.

Well looks like someone is channeling Elizabeth Warren.

Originally Posted by Omnis Dei

Humor is a fine arguing mechanism. Fallacies are not. If you're going to respond to my point, make sure I actually made it.

You said you wanted to ban private schools. So you want to ban people from privately educating others in exchange for money.

Originally Posted by Xei

You said you wanted to ban private schools. So you want to ban people from privately educating others in exchange for money.

in that case wont be too long till religion is outlawed to haha